Through the Lenses of Morality and Responsibility: BRICS, Climate Change and Sustainable Development.

• Author: Kiprizli, Goktug

Introduction

The acronym BRICS stands for five emerging powers, namely Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa. After its formal inception in 2009 in the form of BRIC, the four nations' annual leaders' summits, ministerial meetings, and joint statements initiated the institutionalization of the grouping. The platform took its current design following the addition of South Africa in 2010. Since their success in promoting their economic development has been the bedrock of preserving and maintaining their newly won status, the issues of climate change and sustainable development are relevant to their international image. As a sense of responsibility is closely related to the growing power of the actors on the international stage, (1) the expanding heterogeneity of the developing world differentiates the perceptions of responsibilities for and moral appraisals of how to respond to the prospects of climate change and sustainable development.

Discourse plays a central role in empowering ideas to shape identities and in giving meaning to social and physical phenomena. Defining identity as relational, discourse provides an analytical tool for understanding the relational construction of identity. (2) Social contexts and group membership are determinative functions when an actor frames its attitudes and actions toward any issue. Accordingly, an actor's perception of the Self in relation to the groups with which it is associated shapes social identity. Also, self-categorization relies on the comparison revealing the differences between the perception of self and other relevant out-group members in terms of attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. (3) So, identity is a reflection of a process building on the conceptualizations of the Self and in-group/out-group differentiations. (4)

This article, therefore, intends to address the questions of in what context the BRICS countries frame climate change and sustainable development, how the moral aspect toward and the sense of responsibility for the climate change--sustainable development nexus inspire the BRICS group, and whether this process forges a social identity for the five members. Having been undergirded by the Constructivist point of view, the article argues that the discourse on climate change and sustainable development allows the BRICS members to present a particular self-conception and self-categorization. Within this framework, the discursive position grounded in moral underpinnings and the notion of responsibility outlines the BRICS' commitment to fight against climate change and promote sustainable development. Hence, the self-conception and self-categorization of the BRICS countries contribute to the construction of a distinct social entity at the international level taking shape in line with the group identity as emerging powers, and the BRICS group produces practical outcomes accordingly.

The studies analyzing the BRICS grouping with respect to climate change mainly focus on the importance of their contributions to actions over global climate change, and the potential role of the BRICS partnership in international climate negotiations. (5) Additionally, the works exploring the BRICS countries' engagement in sustainable development initiatives point out their capacities in supporting international efforts. (6) Still, these works limit their analysis by concentrating on material indicators such as these five countries' share of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in order to analyze their role in climate change, and their rapid economic performances to assess their effectiveness in enhancing sustainable development. To the best of my knowledge, no published work has yet drawn up an analytical perspective delving into the moral aspect of and the perception of responsibility for climate change and sustainable development in respect of uncovering the BRICS countries' social identity, whilst revisiting their practices in the areas of climate change mitigation and sustainable development. Thus, the article contributes to the previous literature by presenting the first attempt to discuss the BRICS grouping within this scope.

Also, skeptical views emphasize the disparities between the BRICS states concerning their emissions profiles (7) and their positions in the climate negotiations (8). Some developments such as India's interference in weakening the language of the final text of the twenty-sixth Conference of Parties (COP) (9) or the course of Brazil under President Bolsonaro (2019-ongoing) caused suspicions of divergences surfacing among the BRICS states. (10) While India did not eschew cooperating in Glasgow, Environment Minister Yadav (2021-ongoing) admitted the importance of the BRICS group for India and the platform's "very significant role in addressing [...] climate change". (11) Additionally, President Bolsonaro re-explored the value of the BRICS states in the post-Trump period and underlined the need for "further strengthening of the BRICS strategic partnership". (12)

It is of importance to note that this article does not argue about whether the BRICS grouping is an alliance in international politics or a block in international climate negotiations. Furthermore, it is not the only organization whose members possess dissimilarities. Nevertheless, dialogue among the BRICS states continues, and this enables its members to form a non-Western identity and develop a shared understanding of how to address global challenges, such as climate change and sustainable development.

Furthermore, the literature lacks studies that trace the concepts of morality and responsibility regarding climate change and sustainable development in the realms of discourse and practice. (13) Acknowledging this gap, the article adopts an interpretive discourse analysis which allows it to uncover structures and patterns across texts, and to reveal the connection between words and identity (14) By assembling textual materials, the article draws an integrated frame for the BRICS states' discursive and ideational position. Accordingly, the article collected the declarations of the BRICS platform, high-ranking state representatives' speeches--delivered at UN events, the BRICS summits, the BRICS ministerial meetings, and other multilateral forums--, and official texts. While the annual summit declarations particularly illustrate the BRICS' discursive stance, orientation, and coordination toward major international issues, high-ranking representatives' speeches and texts are the articulations of each country's position, and display a glimpse of their coherence in formulating and advancing the shared discursive framework.

This analysis covers the period from the initiation of the BRICS group onwards. This timeframe corresponds to the process in which the BRICS formed a grouping for those states whose voices were becoming important in global climate discourse and whose efforts were critical in promoting the global sustainable development agenda. The analysis starts by examining materials from the BRICS platform to explore the discursive elements and then delves into speeches and texts to build an integrated frame. Relying on this investigation, the article employs self-conception and self-categorization as its analytical tools in explaining the BRICS identity, as a separate social entity in connection with morality and responsibility. Whilst merging this analytical framework with its methodological approach, the article contributes to the literature by bridging discourse and practice as it focuses on the BRICS nations' efforts at mitigation, their investments in renewables, and the New Development Bank (NDB).

The Moral Dimension of the BRICS' Stance on Achieving Sustainable Development

The identities of actors help to explain their actions in remaining in solidarity with others, which may not produce an optimal profit for them. (15) For this reason, approaches built on actors' morally framed identity conceptions and self-categorizations have more explanatory power than the consequentialist accounting for their behaviors and choices, because morality redresses any cognitive dissonance between actors' decisions and their normative positions. Moreover, the moral aspects of actors' motivations can suppress and regulate selfishly calculated actor behaviors that would challenge the maintenance of the global public good. (16) Providing the basis for the contemporary understanding of sustainability, the Brundtland Report, entitled "Our Common Future", defines sustainable development as "meet[ing] the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [....] and an assurance that those poor get their fair share of the resources required to sustain that growth". (17) The current moral conceptualization is inherited from this definition, since it has introduced intergenerational and intra-generational ideas to the language of sustainability.

In its earliest days, the BRICS grouping considered hunger and poverty eradication, which are the components of sustainable development goals, as "moral, social, political and economic imperative[s] of humankind". (18) The BRICS countries affirmed this intergenerational vision by seeing sustainable development efforts as key elements for future growth and a "responsibility to [...] future generations". (19) The statements delivered by the BRICS leaders confirm this intergenerational vision of sustainable development. The label 'Common Future' represents this perspective, since it refers to an understanding of and expounding upon the morally defined relationship between economic activities and future well-being. Brazil's President Temer (2016-2018) reinvigorated the discourse of the 'Common Future' and recommended integrating this perspective, in order to achieve socially balanced and environmentally friendly economic growth. (20) Also, South Africa's Environmental Affairs Minister Molewa (2014-2018)...